About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)
-- defense secretary nominee, chuck hagel responded to questions concerning past statements on israel, iran, and nuclear weapons. this portion of the hearing is three hours. cable satellite corp. 2013] >> good morning, everybody. the committee meets today to consider the nomination of former senator chuck hagel to be secretary of defense. before i begin, i want to first welcome senator inhofe as the new ranking republican on our committee, succeeding senator mccain. senator mccain has been a great partner over the past six years, and i thank him for all the work he has done to get bills enacted, his leadership on a host of issues, his support for the work of this committee, and for always keeping our hearings likely. -- lively. senator inhofe has shown his strong commitment to the national defense over his 20 years on this committee. and i know that we are going to work well together and continue the bipartisan tradition of the committee. we are also pleased to welcome the eight senators who are joining the committee this year, both of those who are new to the senate and those who are new t
>> president obama has nominated chuck hagel to replacereplace leon panetta as e secretary. mr. hegel is a war veteran. he served in the senate until 2009. after his senate career, he became part of a foreign-policy think tank. at his confirmation hearing today, he had some back and forth with former colleagues, including senator john mccain. that exchange is about an hour and a half into the hearing. later, we will get your thoughts about the nomination and hearing on our phone lines at 11:00 p.m. eastern, 8:00 pacific. carl levin chairs the armed services committee and makes the opening statement. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> good morning, everybody. the committee meets today to consider the nomination of former senator chuck hagel to be secretary of defense. before i begin, i want to first welcome senator inhofe as the new ranking republican on our committee, succeeding senator mccain. senator mccain has been a great partner over the past six years, and i thank him for all the work he has
hagel. i think he'd be a good secretary of defense, but the performance yesterday was panned by people on all sides of the political spectrum. >> as claire mccaskill told me yesterday, she said, look. he is more used to asking questions than answering questions. there were a lot of issues. and what didn't help, of course, is that his former good friend, john mccain, just eviscerated him, grilled him, didn't give him a chance. yes or no. give me an answer. were you correct or incorrect? i mean, there is a way to try to do that, but clearly he came with a very hostile attitude. and it was very painful to watch. >> yeah. awkward at times. >> i mean, john mccain, mika, didn't let him answer a question. i'm sorry, out of that exchange, it was not chuck hagel who looked bad. >> ted cruz looked even worse. >> yeah. >> oh, my god. >> we're going to show all those coming up. >> he wasn't prepared, mika, in a lot of ways that were concerning. i think, again, the democrats, republicans, independents alike, if the republicans party thinks badgering an ill-prepared witness that way is going to help
chuck hagel's nomination. let's listen to senator reid reacting to the republicans holding up hagel's nomination. >> but it's shocking that my republican colleagues would leave the nation without a fully empowered secretary of defense. for the sake of our national security, it's time to put aside this political theater. and that's what it is. it's tragic that they've decided to filibuster this qualified nominee. it is really unfortunate. >> can you give us the status of this whole thing and explain where we are in the process? >> as we know, the republicans did not allow a vote to happen. they invoke cloture which means it's on hold. what's happened now is the congress on a break for a week, chuck hagel's got to wait around. and there's a concern, i think, at the white house and other areas that something could come up. that's what people are looking for. the white house is expressing confidence. president obama said he's confident this will happen. and other administration officials have put the word out that they are confident. but whether it happens or not after congress gets bac
's talk about chuck hagel's confirmation. i'm sure you saw it. it was great television. a lot of fireworks between hagel and john mccain. take a look. >> we are correct or incorrect. yes or no? >> my reference to the refer -- >> the question is were you right or wrong. that's a pretty straight forward question. i would like to answer and then you are free to elaborate. >> i am not going to give you a yes or no answer. >> joe, first of all, let me ask you this. the white house didn't jump to his defense after that stuff. why not? >> who didn't? >> the white house. the white house didn't jump to his defense. >> the white house has a sense that he has a good chance to be confirmed and everybody know that is the hearings will be contentious. no doubt there will be a lot of consengz and a lot of bad blood between this senator and colleagues and many who question his stance with regard to iran and how strong he would be and also with regard to israel. expect contention. that doesn't mean he won't be confirmed. i don't think the white house will jump to his defense. >> again, white house didn't j
that "anti-israel hagel" and that is there a statement, not yours, why do you think they have that impression? >> first, it is not an accurate quote. >> it is an accurate quotationof of the iranian press. >> it is not an accurate statement of my position. >> right, but why you think they have that impression? >> as i said earlier, have enough difficulty understanding american politics. i surely do not understand iranian politics. but if i might add, i also said there have been some rather significant israeli government leaders who said some pretty nice things about me, current israeli leaders. >> ok, thank you. >> senator king. >> like all of the other today, i want to thank you for your service and particularly your willingness to put yourself through this process to serve your country once again. it is one of my life principles to never take a job where i would have to be confirmed by legislative body. [laughter] and you are doing it. i read one commentator that said, the fact that this guy was an enlisted man in vietnam is nice, but not significant. i think it is very significant. i am a b
you, mr. chairman. good morning senator hagel. thank you for your willingness to heed the call and had a part of defense. we had a good meeting last week and covered many of the threats and challenges our country faces shrinking budgets, a strategic national security shifts and as you have underlined over and over again, we continue to provide fair and equal opportunities for all our service members and their families. i appreciate your opportunity and i will take you look better you -- up on your offer if you are confirmed to continue sitting down with you as a member of the armed services committee. i know this issue has already been addressed but i want to make sure i'm on the record is raising my concerns and this committee should give you every opportunity to clarify and underline your point of view. when we met privately, you emphasized your determination to keep all options on the table with regard to iran, including a military strike if iraq and continues to pursue a nuclear program in defiance of its international obligations. you also discussed your longstanding approach to i
a minute. tomorrow, the senate will be in doing a test vote on chuck hagel's nomination for defense secretary. it is a culture wrote -- it is a cloture vote. of congressional hearings going on today. a couple of them are live on c- span 3 or [inaudible]. if you go there you will be able to see all of the hearings. thank you for being with us on the "washington journal." the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., february 14, 2013. i hereby appoint the honorable chris collins to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 3, 2013, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip limited t
questions about defense secretary nominee chuck hagel. this is 45 minutes. >> good afternoon. happy friday. i have no announcements, i will go straight to questions. you probably have in your inbox, statements from the president on departure.o- chu's he is thanks for his -- he brought a unique understanding on the urgent challenge augmented by -- presented by climate change. during his time as secretary, he held my administration move america from real energy independence. we have doubled the use of renewable energy, dramatically reduce our dependence on foreign oil. you can read the full statement at your leisure. i will go to questions >> does the president considered the attack in turkey to be a terrorist attack? >> a suicide bombing on the perimeter of an embassy is, by definition, an act of terror. we do not know at this point who is responsible or the motivations behind the attack. the attack itself is clearly an act of terror. >> the birth control -- is this recognition that the initial rules were an overreach? >> not at all. for details about the rulemaking process on which there
and leadership. and the second is do you support chuck hagel as secretary of defense and what is your evaluation of the criticisms of american general since world war ii. except for you and general petraeus. [laughter] >> you know, it's painful to read about general is being criticized because a lot of it is correct. you see it, and you say, oh, that's me, i am guilty of that. we had shortcomings of not being strategically enough minded, you know, you get very focused on her job, your tactical part of the mission, not thinking of the big strategic problem that you are trying to solve. that may or may not be a good criticism, but it's certainly worth paying attention to. but it is a useful thing to throw out there. what was the first one? >> okay. >> if chuck hagel will take the job right now, god bless them. whoever will be the secretary of defense, they will go through this constricting budget, they will implement things in combat. implementing it is going to be hard. something is going to come to ahead with iran during this for years, just mathematically. it will be a very difficult for years.
quick questions. thank you for your service and leadership. one, do you support or oppose chuck hagel as secretary of defense? to, what is your violation of thomas ricks criticism of american generals since world war ii except for you and general petraeus? [laughter] >> altaic the second verse. it's painful to read about generals being criticized because a lot of it's correct. you see it and say that's me, i'm guilty of that. we had shortcomings of not being strategically enough minded. you know, you get focused on your job, your tactical part of the mission and not digging the big strategic problem you're trying to solve. one is not firing enough people. we don't fire and not generals. .. you know, from the senate, his time in vietnam is useful because it gives you a context. the most important thing is if he and president obama are a good team, that is what matters. though much worry about his policy positions one way or another because he will be a policy maker. the president's policies will go but the fact that the field that they can be a good team, to me that is the important th
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)